Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Yet another dSLR thread: Canon, Nikon, Pentax, ~$1,200 budget, not for concerts  (Read 11854 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline phanophish

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Gender: Male
    • ImageLume Photography
I may get hung up more on ISO performance that I should. I shoot weddings and concerts, both situations have very challenging low levels of light and particularity with weddings the quality at higher ISO setting is important. I just know it is frustrating to be in a situation where I'd like to bump the ISO up but I'm worried about noise.  When I only had a couple of D70s it was a constant trade off, with the D200 I just go right to 1600 for concerts and non flash wedding stuff if I need to. If I had a D3 I'd probably be at 3200 or 6400, that camera is simply amazing.  I'm lusting after a D3 so bad right now, and after seeing the improvement from my D200s to the D300 my brother just got it is not helping any. 

The bottom line is you can get great images with any of the modern DSLRs they are all to the point they are better than film and digital gives you the flexibility to experiment and use tools like Photoshop to do some amazing things in post processing.  One other suggestion, Noiseware.  It's like Magic for Photoshop.  Check out this thread...  http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,88485.0.html  It also give a good example of ISO noise in a low light situation, almost a worst case scenario.  Low light, lots of shadow areas, dark clothing, moving subjects and so on.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2008, 10:27:35 AM by phanophish »
______________________________________________
Audio: MBHO 603/KA200N or AKG C2000B>Edirol R44
http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/phanophish

Photo:  Nikon D300, D200, 35mm f/1.8,  50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, Nikon 17-55 f/2.8, Sigma 18-50/2.8 Macro, 18-70 f/4.5-5.6, 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 VR, Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6, Nikon 70-200 f/2.8VR, SB-800

Jake: What's this?
Elwood: What?
Jake: This car. This stupid car. Where's the Cadillac? The Caddy? Where's the Caddy?
Elwood: The what?
Jake: The Cadillac we used to have. The Blues Mobile!
Elwood: I traded it.
Jake: You traded the Blues Mobile for this?
Elwood: No. For a microphone.
Jake: A microphone? Okay I can see that.

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Frank -- Actually, the point about not knowing until I, well...try / know, is spot on, and far more helpful than you think.  I need to pull the trigger, otherwise I'll remain in my current state:  options paralysis.  Hmmmm...Mac = Canon, PC = Nikon.  I guess Pentax = Linux, then?  :P

Another thing I need to remember - Phano, you mention it in your response, and Ken Rockwell's site makes this point ad nauseum, in his own blunt way:  until / unless I get a LOT better in my shooting, I will be the single most limiting factor in the quality of my pictures - not the gear.  Even so, I have a strong appreciation for quality gear, and trying to get the best value for my money.  This would all be much easier if I simply allocated another $1k or so.  :P

Phano -- interesting note on Noiseware.  The sample crop of Les provided a stunning improvement.  Gonna have to check out Noiseware, for sure.

I'm going to poke around a bit more, but at this point, I feel like I pretty fully understand my options and just need to mull it over before pulling the trigger.  Thanks again for the good responses, everyone.  :coolguy:
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline Frank in JC

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 310
  • (formerly Frank M, but that guy forgot his pwd)
Hmmmm...Mac = Canon, PC = Nikon.  I guess Pentax = Linux, then?  :P

Linux = Lomo!

http://shop.lomography.com/shop/

Favorite generic quote from Archive.org:
"This recording is SICK--it's almost as good as a soundboard!"

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
I shoot strictly handheld, and don't plan on moving to a tripod, though I may eventually opt for a monopod.  FWIW, I don't expect my usage to change dramatically, though I may end up doing significantly more family-oriented pics of nieces, pets, grandparents, and such, but...who knows? 

Hey Bri!

You didn't mention much about your flash usage habits. Do you tend to make use of the pop-up flash for fill-ins, or do you intend to go for an external flash? I didn't see it in your budget. Or are you a purist who do existing/ambient light only, no matter what the situation?

The flash habit would influence my choice of lense, that's why I'm asking...

/J
Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
MD transfers: MZ-RH1. Tape transfers: Nak DR-1
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
You didn't mention much about your flash usage habits. Do you tend to make use of the pop-up flash for fill-ins, or do you intend to go for an external flash? I didn't see it in your budget. Or are you a purist who do existing/ambient light only, no matter what the situation?

Not sure what I'll do about flash.  It's an area in which I have zero experience.  Not necessarily a purist.  I can see using a flash for fill-ins, but don't know whether pop-up or external makes more sense.  It's not something I'm terribly concerned about at this point, which is one of the reasons I didn't mention it.  I guess my assumption is that a moderately fast wide angle zoom + a very fast prime will preclude me from needing to use flash all that often.  But...I won't know til I get out there and start shooting again.

For the sake of (my) education:  do you have a flash you'd recommend for the three bodies under consideration?  And what lens recommendations would you make based on using flash (either pop-up or external) for fill-in?
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline Frank in JC

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 310
  • (formerly Frank M, but that guy forgot his pwd)
For the sake of (my) education:  do you have a flash you'd recommend for the three bodies under consideration?  And what lens recommendations would you make based on using flash (either pop-up or external) for fill-in?

The Nikon's built-in flash has a feature called "commander mode," that allows you to cordlessly use an SB-800 or SB-600 flash unit off-camera.  The pop-up flash works as the commander and uses pulses of light to communicate with the flash.  It's not a slave mode either, it's very smart.  Just as if they were attached, the data encoded in the flash pulses tell the remote flash when to fire, at what power level, and for how long. 

Off-camera flash looks a lot nicer than on-camera, which tends to make everything look flat.  Nikon gives you this feature for "free," but I think you need additional accessories in order to do it with Canon.
Favorite generic quote from Archive.org:
"This recording is SICK--it's almost as good as a soundboard!"

Offline phanophish

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Gender: Male
    • ImageLume Photography
For the sake of (my) education:  do you have a flash you'd recommend for the three bodies under consideration?  And what lens recommendations would you make based on using flash (either pop-up or external) for fill-in?

The Nikon's built-in flash has a feature called "commander mode," that allows you to cordlessly use an SB-800 or SB-600 flash unit off-camera.  The pop-up flash works as the commander and uses pulses of light to communicate with the flash.  It's not a slave mode either, it's very smart.  Just as if they were attached, the data encoded in the flash pulses tell the remote flash when to fire, at what power level, and for how long. 

Off-camera flash looks a lot nicer than on-camera, which tends to make everything look flat.  Nikon gives you this feature for "free," but I think you need additional accessories in order to do it with Canon.

This is going to me the mother of all verbose threads.  For Nikon or Canon go with the Nikon or Canon Flashes.  They integrate much better with the metering systems and provide some additional features that most other flashes do not offer.  For Nikon if you have any body D70 or above (D80, D200, etc) the built in flash can remotely control a SB-600 or SB-800 flash.  Canon has a similar feature on their higher end external flashes but since I'm more a Nikon shooter I'm not familiar enough with the details to provide good information.  It looks like Pentax has a similar function but again I'm not the expert.  I have used the Nikon Wireless TTL flash to do some cool stuff but it takes some practice to really get the swing of.  Here's an example though.  I moved the flash off camera to get a more creative lighting placement.  I was shooting with a Sigma 10-20 Wide Angle, basically holding the camera over the group dancing while I was on the outside of basically a huddle, the sort of thing you see after a sports event all the time.  It was a totally automated exposure, focus, everything.  The TTL flash and built in meter nailed the exposure and getting the camera in a location where I could not even see in the viewfinder made the image.  I would not have been able to get this shot without the wireless off camera flash.  There are other ways to do the same thing manually and it can be a really fun way to get creative with photography.  The best online resource for flash photography is http://www.strobist.blogspot.com/  It is a great site and is all about the DIY ethic & low budget flash photography.

 

______________________________________________
Audio: MBHO 603/KA200N or AKG C2000B>Edirol R44
http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/phanophish

Photo:  Nikon D300, D200, 35mm f/1.8,  50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, Nikon 17-55 f/2.8, Sigma 18-50/2.8 Macro, 18-70 f/4.5-5.6, 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 VR, Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6, Nikon 70-200 f/2.8VR, SB-800

Jake: What's this?
Elwood: What?
Jake: This car. This stupid car. Where's the Cadillac? The Caddy? Where's the Caddy?
Elwood: The what?
Jake: The Cadillac we used to have. The Blues Mobile!
Elwood: I traded it.
Jake: You traded the Blues Mobile for this?
Elwood: No. For a microphone.
Jake: A microphone? Okay I can see that.

Offline gearscout

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Yes, very thorough...agonizing even.  But I admire the effort!   ::)

There are all kinds of 'Nikonians' who have upgraded from the D200 to the D300 for added ISO performance.  They are now selling their D200's for half the price they paid (or less, in some cases.)  Many of them only have a few thousand 'clicks' on them (actuations is the official term, I believe.)  That would translate to somewhere between $600 and $800 for the body.

By using a free software program called Opanda Power Exif, you can tell how many shutter releases the D200 has.  Just shoot a photo, view it in Opanda, and it's one of the data entries returned.  Don't worry, the guy who owns it doesn't care that he's only taken a couple thousand shots and is basically selling a brand new camera.

It is characteristic of an entire class of photographers who research and enjoy owning the latest high-quality photographic equipment much more than they actually enjoy photography.    Well, at least we can say they enjoy buying new equipment even though they don't really use it much.

I focus on the D200 because it is capable of being used with nearly every lens made by Nikon since the early 1970's. 

These AI/AIS lenses don't have autofocus features, but meter nicely on the D200, so you can shoot on aperture priority and simply focus manually.  These can be purchased for bargain prices on eBay and other outlets because most of these same people want auto-focus lenses.  I have a 20mm/f4 made in 1973 that takes stunning images.  $125.   In fact, I would argue that Nikkor's "old glass" is as good, or better, than what you can buy today.  I am not a fan of Sigma etc.  I would certainly consider the Nikon 50mm 1.8 AF lens brand new.  It's cheap and it's performance is excellent.

So, if I had a budget of $1200 and wanted to find a bargain in a DSLR, I would marry my best-featured-for-the-money DX camera to its ability to use the greatest numbers of high-quality, low-priced lenses. 

Make sense?

Certainly it makes more sense than paying $1600 for a camera, using it like the price of digital images was tied to the price of gas and then selling it 12 months later for half what you paid.

Try Nikonians.org to buy a used D200.  They have had some problems with internet sellers of late, so be sure to get, and be ready to furnish, references.  Use PayPal. 
 

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Thanks for the input, Gearscout.  Gear sluts in the camera community?  Noooooo...say it ain't so!  I appreciate the feedback, and the tip on the Nikonian site - looks like yet another cool resource.

Thanks for the flash feedback, Phano.  Gonna have to give that one more thought, as it's spurred consideration of an issue I'd not thought of before.
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline phanophish

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Gender: Male
    • ImageLume Photography
And you thought you were over thinking this.  Get some camera geeks together and we'll make you think you missed everything.   ;)
______________________________________________
Audio: MBHO 603/KA200N or AKG C2000B>Edirol R44
http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/phanophish

Photo:  Nikon D300, D200, 35mm f/1.8,  50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, Nikon 17-55 f/2.8, Sigma 18-50/2.8 Macro, 18-70 f/4.5-5.6, 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 VR, Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6, Nikon 70-200 f/2.8VR, SB-800

Jake: What's this?
Elwood: What?
Jake: This car. This stupid car. Where's the Cadillac? The Caddy? Where's the Caddy?
Elwood: The what?
Jake: The Cadillac we used to have. The Blues Mobile!
Elwood: I traded it.
Jake: You traded the Blues Mobile for this?
Elwood: No. For a microphone.
Jake: A microphone? Okay I can see that.

Offline Frank in JC

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 310
  • (formerly Frank M, but that guy forgot his pwd)
There are more than a few guys who constantly upgrade "just because," even though they are unskilled photographers.  (Just like the "audiophiles" who constantly buy and sell equipment, but really aren't into music.)  However, the D300 really is a significant improvement over the D200.  My photos look nicer, there's no question.

I use an old manual focus Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 on my D300 that takes amazing photos, but I want to use manual focus for macro shots anyway.  Manual focus would be a hassle for most of the stuff I do, especially given the small image in the viewfinder produced by a cropped-sensor DSLR, and the absence of a split-prism.  (I'm not a fan of the green dot indicator.)  Plus, the D300's AF system is really, really good.

You'll see ;)


Yes, very thorough...agonizing even.  But I admire the effort!   ::)

There are all kinds of 'Nikonians' who have upgraded from the D200 to the D300 for added ISO performance.  They are now selling their D200's for half the price they paid (or less, in some cases.)  Many of them only have a few thousand 'clicks' on them (actuations is the official term, I believe.)  That would translate to somewhere between $600 and $800 for the body.

By using a free software program called Opanda Power Exif, you can tell how many shutter releases the D200 has.  Just shoot a photo, view it in Opanda, and it's one of the data entries returned.  Don't worry, the guy who owns it doesn't care that he's only taken a couple thousand shots and is basically selling a brand new camera.

It is characteristic of an entire class of photographers who research and enjoy owning the latest high-quality photographic equipment much more than they actually enjoy photography.    Well, at least we can say they enjoy buying new equipment even though they don't really use it much.

I focus on the D200 because it is capable of being used with nearly every lens made by Nikon since the early 1970's. 

These AI/AIS lenses don't have autofocus features, but meter nicely on the D200, so you can shoot on aperture priority and simply focus manually.  These can be purchased for bargain prices on eBay and other outlets because most of these same people want auto-focus lenses.  I have a 20mm/f4 made in 1973 that takes stunning images.  $125.   In fact, I would argue that Nikkor's "old glass" is as good, or better, than what you can buy today.  I am not a fan of Sigma etc.  I would certainly consider the Nikon 50mm 1.8 AF lens brand new.  It's cheap and it's performance is excellent.

So, if I had a budget of $1200 and wanted to find a bargain in a DSLR, I would marry my best-featured-for-the-money DX camera to its ability to use the greatest numbers of high-quality, low-priced lenses. 

Make sense?

Certainly it makes more sense than paying $1600 for a camera, using it like the price of digital images was tied to the price of gas and then selling it 12 months later for half what you paid.

Try Nikonians.org to buy a used D200.  They have had some problems with internet sellers of late, so be sure to get, and be ready to furnish, references.  Use PayPal. 
 

Favorite generic quote from Archive.org:
"This recording is SICK--it's almost as good as a soundboard!"

Offline gearscout

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Just saw 2 D200's go on sale on Nikonians.org  They're picked up very quickly.

These are really good deals, IMHO.
-----------------------------              
Selling my Nikon D200 in MINT condition...
Comes with After-Market 1700 Mah battery and original charger.
Has about 10K clicks on it
Camera well kept and comes w/ box, manual and its accessories
Asking: $725.00 shipped
-----------------------------

The other one was $1050, including verticle grip that allows you to use 2 batteries at once with portrait orientation buttons etc., dual battery charger and extended warranty.  Even buying this and the new f1.8 50mm would only put you $50 over budget.  The photos that accompanied this sale were great.  The camera, all it's original boxes, and, to all appearances, absolutely pristine!  I can't even remember my camera looking like this!

D200 Body with original box
2 years Nikon’s extended warranty
MB-D200 Battery Grip with AA Battery Holder with original box (Edit: $160 @ B&H)
Two EN-EL3e Rechargeable Li-ion Battery (Edit: Around $70)
MH-18A Battery Charger with AC Cord (Edit: $47 @ B&H)
MH-19 charger plus PW-EC1 cigarette-lighter adapter (Edit: About $25-100 total)

(Edit: Standard Accessories)

USB Cable
Video Cable
Black Body Cap
DK-21 Rubber Eyecup
Neck Strap
Software CD-ROM
Instruction Booklets
-------------------------------------

Insane Eddie has LOTS of cousins!   :o

As Frank might note, the D300 has lots of great features and is a logical upgrade for performance in the Nikon lineup.  Thank goodness.  It's creating real bargains for photographers who can take advantage of "Nikon Acquisition Syndrome" (NAS) among others.   :)
« Last Edit: March 23, 2008, 08:56:11 AM by gearscout »

Offline bluntforcetrauma

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 879
  • Gender: Male
    • http://themovementschool.org
Why Nikon and not Canon? I am just wondering.

This is what i am considering purchasing. I am not a professional photographer at all, but I want to upgrade from where i am at, BUT I dont think i need to go too far up the upgrade ladder right now.  I imagine you can always upgrade. I am going use the camera for a multi-purpose for concert photos and portraits, in which I photo individuals with neurological disorders which is hard for them to " hold" a pose. So i need quick glass to get the keep the quick movements to a minimum as far as blur.

so I am thinking this is my path

CAnon rebel xti

With the lenses

70-200L IS f2.8 zoom

EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM  wide angle

Please advise--I dont want to purchase something that would not meet my situations listed above.

Again i can always upgrade in the future, but for now will what i listed produce good resuslts?

thanks

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
For the sake of (my) education:  do you have a flash you'd recommend for the three bodies under consideration?  And what lens recommendations would you make based on using flash (either pop-up or external) for fill-in?

The Nikon's built-in flash has a feature called "commander mode," that allows you to cordlessly use an SB-800 or SB-600 flash unit off-camera.

QFT. After 20 years of flash use, my mindset is still stuck in the old world, and I'm just beginning to explore my SB-800. But it opens up a lot of new possibilities.

Bri, my concern was that you rely on the pop-up flash and select a wide angle that obstructs the path of light when zoomed out full. That's the case with my Nikkor 18-70, which means that any shot taken with a diameter under 30mm or so will be spoiled by a black crescent at the bottom of the picture. This is when you need a standalone flash that can you can bounce into the ceiling, preferably with an opaque plastic "bouncer" add-on. Once you've mastered the technique, you'll never have to worry about harsh light flash portraits again.

bluntforcetrauma, this one's for you as well. Use a fill-in flash too for your portraits. The money you pour into a super-fast lense will give you more returns if you put aside a few $100's for a decent flash, and you won't need to squeeze out that last aperture step anymore.
The Nikon SB series has a big selling point here against the Canons, but then I'm biased. Let an experienced Canon flash user speak, and he'll prove you can still get great results.
Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
MD transfers: MZ-RH1. Tape transfers: Nak DR-1
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800

Offline gearscout

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Why Nikon and not Canon? I am just wondering.

There isn't much difference in terms of the final results.  After all, the photographer and the technique have much, much more to do with a good photo than the camera.  The "feel," menu systems and layout are probably a bigger difference.  I don't subscribe to the notion that one of these brands is better than the other.   Like the Nikon D80, the Rebel XTi is plastic.  The D200 is a metal body, weather/dust sealed...and much higher priced.  I was recommending that camera as one of the better ones you can buy today at a great price point.

Your questions about freezing the action in dimly lit concerts and for portraits raises a sticky issue for most digital cameras: low light performance.  You camera and lens selection looks pretty well balanced...I might opt to throw in a 35mm or 50mm prime capable of faster performance than f/2.8   

What sunjan writes is true, only an external flash will lock in your results in many situations.  The on-board flash in a lot of these cameras is either too much at short range or too little at longer focal lengths.  I have and use an SB800 and utilize bounce or a Lightsphere diffuser, even in daylight.  I don't think anything matches natural lighting with a fast lens, but having said that, there are situations where it simply doesn't work.  They now make a little diffuser for Nikon or Canon that goes over the onboard flash. (One is called the "Puffer Pop-Up" and is sold for less than $10 on eBay.)  I've not tried it.  I just wonder whether spending $300 on a full-blown flash can find room in the budget.  Maybe it should.





 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.079 seconds with 39 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF